usaid/asia, confidence in quality, presentation, 11-2007

7/31/2019 USAID/Asia, Confidence in Quality, Presentation, 11-2007

1/32

How EnergyHow Energy--Saving Compac t Fluoresc ent Lamps (CFLs)Saving Compac t Fluoresc ent Lamps (CFLs)

Can Help Asia Address Climate ChangeCan Help Asia Address Climate Change

, ,, ,My Ton, Regiona l CFL ExpertMy Ton, Regiona l CFL Expert

ECOECO--Asia Clean Deve lopment and Climate Prog ramAsia Clean Deve lopment and Climate Prog ram

Presente at t e reg ona wor s op:Presente at t e reg ona wor s op:

Confidenc e in Quality: Eliminating Shod dyConfidenc e in Quality: Eliminating Shod dyCFL Prod uc ts within ASEAN CountriesCFL Prod uc ts within ASEAN Countries

1a

Bangkok, ThailandBangkok, Thailand2525--26 Oc tober 200726 Oc tober 2007


2/32

2


3/32

3

. .

to offsetemissions o

officials fl in to

international

meetings


4/32

4

Problem Statement mes

Regional Analysis of CFLPrograms and Markets

ofNewYorkTi

The Issue of CFL Quality CFL Regulations and the Cost

Courtesy

of Compliance

Findings andRecommendations


5/32

5


6/32

6

Overview Regulations Pertaining to CFLs on a Global Scale

Status Countries Details

Legislation

Implemented

Portugal Regulatory "carbon-tax" published in June 07, implementation in Sept 07. Regulation affects almost

all GLS and halogen lamps. Models show the tax will be roughly 1 per lamp.Enacted Ban of Sin le-Coil GLS lam s

LegislationActivelyPrepared

Austria Taxation concept not supported by industry, promotional activities instead

UK No legislation but agreement with retailers & producers to phase-out CLAS A GLS until 2011 +develop a Business discussion with a focus first on CLAS A

Switzerland Discussion with government about ban of Energy Label F&G

Australia Proposal made by Australian Lighting Association to ban lamps >20 lumens/watt starting Oct 2008

Venezuela Ban of all GLS lamps in 2006 (draft) : stopped but expected short-term

~ . -

Thailand Announcement that Asia Lamp and LKS will revert to CFLi production. Phase-out of GLS starting in2008.

Ireland Government announced purchasing limitation for public bodies and potential taxation on GLS

USA California stepwise transition of all general purpose and directional lighting to high efficiency lightsources by 2017 - Ban GLS after 2011

Other states: Bills to either prohibit the sale of incandescents or study possibility of prohibiting sales:10 States

, ,as sole contact group for Congress.

Canada Performance standards expected, not ban

Source: OSRAM, June 2007


7/32

7

The ur enc of climate chan e combined with oliticalcommitments worldwide to phase out incandescentlamps have the makings of massive policy failure:

If a global quality assurance scheme for compactfluorescent lamps (CFLs) is not put in place soon,consumer confidence in CFLs will plummet.


8/32

8


9/32

9


10/32

10

Markets


11/32

11

Funded by the USAID ECO-Asia Clean

Covered China, India, Indonesia, Philippines,Thailand, and Vietnam (96% of GDP ofdevelo in Asia

Analysis covered: CFL quality

Certification procedures Mandatory and voluntary compliance

. Build on earlier work and reports (such as

Australian CFL benchmarking report)

harmonizing and rationalizing CFL programs andregulation in Asia


12/32

12Estimated Global CFL Sales and Chinese Production

3000

2000

2500

fCFLs

Post-1997 sales

Sales

Estimatin 500

1000

1500

Numbero

Chinese production(CALI data)

Global CFL sales

Market Size 01990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Source: IAEEL for pre-1997 data; CALI and ECO-Asia estimates for post-2007

Annual Volume (in million units)

Summary of Regional CFL Product ion and Sales

Country 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

China 750 800 1,040 1,380 1,760 2,400

India NA 34 40 46 70 100

Indonesia 10 40 50 60 70 90

Philippines 4.5 NA NA 18 25 NA

Source: Australian Green House Office Reports 2006, and ECO-Asia 2007

Vietnam NA NA 5.4 7 8.4 11


13/32

13

Countryu

Manufacturers in 2006

China 150

India 8

Indonesia 11

Philippines 0

a an

Vietnam 7


14/32

14


15/32

15

Pressure to lower production costs in order to sell CFLs intos an mar ets

Race to the Bottom in terms of CFL product performance formany market segments

Lack of commonly used and agreed uponinternationalstandards for testing and performance

If CFLs do not exceed erformance of incandescents ossibilitof consumer backlash (i.e. U.S. in early 90s)

, -faster, or gives off less light, than advertised, or than prescribedby national standards and guidelines.


16/32

16

Breakdown of Quality Market Segments for Self-Ballasted CFLs

Market category Description of market category

High quality Well-known name brands, such as OSRAM, Philips,

National/Panasonic, GE, etc.n erna ona e - nown

brands 6,000 hour lifetime Evidence of testing and/or quality registration

High quality Not well-known name brands

National/Not-well knownbrands

, our e me Evidence of testing and/or quality registration

Not well-known name brandsPoor quality , o , our e me

Little or no evidence of testing

Not well-known name brands

Very poor quality,

Little or no evidence of testing and/or quality registration Typically US$1 or less in the market


17/32

17

Different CFL Quality Levels

Country High Quality Well-known brands (%)

High Quality Not well-known brands (%)

Poor & Very PoorQuality (%)

China 15 30 55India NA NA 40

Philippines 68 32

Thailand 70 15 15

Vietnam 17 44 39


18/32

18

CFL Price Trends:A Race to the Bottom?

1.8

1.4

1.6

/lamp) Philippines

1

1.2

nitvalue(US$

AustraliaNew Zealand

0.6

0.8

Averageu

Indonesia

0.4

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Year

Source: Australian Greenhouse Office, 2006


19/32

19


20/32

20

Requirements

CFL Test Protocol Basic Safety Minimum Energy Energy

Standard

Standard

China 9mandatory

9

mandatory9a 9

Voluntary

Indiab 9

voluntaryb9

voluntaryb Xb 9

voluntaryb

Indonesia Xc 9 X 9mandatory voluntaryc

Philippines 9mandatory

9

mandatory9

mandatory9

mandatory

a anvoluntary mandatory mandatory voluntary

Vietnam X X 9voluntar

X

a. Multi-tiered with voluntary and mandatory elements.b. Indian standards are expected to become mandatory in 2007c. Standards under consideration


21/32

21

4 mandator labellin ro rams for CFLs

24 voluntary labelling programs for CFLs

13 mandator Minimum Ener Performance

Standards (MEPS), with 1 under consideration.


22/32

22

Comparison: Efficacy RequirementsCALI 1

70

80

CNISMEPS

High-

50

60

ents(lm/W)

Vietnam

ELIMEPS

Efficiency

30

40

icacyRequire

CECP

Energy Star

High-Efficiency

levels

10

20Ef

Energy Star (4)

Proposed

CALI 2

5 to


23/32

23

Comparison of Minimum Efficiency Standards forCFLs, Showing the Different Size Categories in Use

Category(W)

MinimumEfficacy

(l/W)

Category(W)

MinimumEfficacy

(l/W)

Category(W)

MinimumEfficacy

(l/W)

Category(W)

MinimumEfficacy

(l/W)

Category(W)

MinimumEfficacy

(l/W)

- - -. .

8-15 50 9-14 44-48 7 50 10-15W

48.0 9 - 14 45

15-23 55 15-24 51-55 9 55 15-20W

58.0 15 - 24 55

- - . -

18 60.5

26 61.5


24/32

24

Measured Lifetime vs. Lumen Maintenance forPhilippines CFLs

90

95

hrs)

ran ran ran

75

80

85

ce(%a

t2,000

60

65

70

en

Maintenan

35% of models tested did not pass the

80% lumen maintenance test

50

55

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 11,000 12,000

Lum

Measured Lifetime (hrs)

Source: Philippines Department of Energy


25/32

25

How Test Results can be Used to Highlight High-Performing Products (from New Zealand)


26/32

26

Summary of Survey on Manufacturer Testing andCompliance Costs

Economy Estimated Compliance Costs per SupplierApproximate Annual Costs Costs as % of Production

Costs

Australia USD$3,000-5,000 Up to 1%

China

USD 20,000-50,000 (domestic) 0.2-11.2%

USD$50,000-150,000 (export) 0.2-4.4%

USD$30,000-60,000 (domestic) Up to 1%

USD$25,000-60,000 (import) Up to 1%

IndonesiaInitial: USD$9,000 and USD$2,000 Not available

Annual: USD$3,500 and USD$600 Not available

PhilippinesUSD$10,000-$92,000 (domestic) 1.2-2.0%

USD$25,000 (export) Not available

US$ 20 000 domestic Not availableVietnam

US$ 30,000-$50,000 (import) Not available

Source: Australian Greenhouse Office 2006


27/32

27


28/32

28

1. Ra id rowth in CFL roduction ca acit Shortage of materials, quality concerns

2. Proliferation of CFL promotional programs

3. Proliferation of CFL standards and specifications No common quality standards (testing, performance)

4. Little/no publicly available test data on CFL quality

5. No price signal for high-quality CFLs Lack of regionally recognized quality threshold


29/32

29

Private Sector to Develop a Common Approach

International CFL Harmonization Initiative (CFLI) Test protocol, performance tiers, compliance

Global lighting initiative to assist in GLS phase-out BRESL regional program

c en g ng n a ve Only international CFL quality certification scheme

International Energy Agency High-level policy dialogue, analysis

USAID ECO-Asia Clean Development and Climate Enhance re ional information-sharin romote re ional a reements

(harmonization), encourage national initiatives


30/32

30

1. Recognize that sub-standard CFLs are a serious policy problem

2. Develop regional agreement on a common test procedure

3. Develop common performance quality standards for the region

4. Adopt the ELI scheme as regional quality certification level5. Develop a framework for standards and labelling of CFLs

6. Increase public awareness about CFL quality

7. Seek funding for testing and compliance8. Seek technical assistance in improving CFL manufacture.

9. Provide exchange of information and technical experts


31/32

31

Summary of Priority Actions to Improve CFL Quality

CFL Stakeholder

Natl

Govts

Regional

Govts

Funding

Agencies

Test

Labs

Suppliers NGOs

1. Recognize that sub-standardCFLs are a serious policy problem z

| | | |

2. Develop regional agreement on acommon test rocedure z z

| | |

3. Develop common performancequality standards for the region z z | | | |

4. Adopt the ELI scheme as regionalz z | | | |

5. Develop a framework forstandards and labelling of CFLs z z

| | | |

6. Increase public awareness about z | | | zqua y

7. Seek funding for testing andcompliance

| | z |

8. Seek technical assistance inimproving CFL manufacture.

9. Provide exchange of informationand technical experts

| | z


32/32

32

Thank youThank you

usaid/asia, confidence in quality, presentation, 11-2007

Documents